Conkling v. Bloodgood
This text of 12 Wend. 279 (Conkling v. Bloodgood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
On a motion for re-taxation of costs in this cause, the Chief Justice ruled, that where a cause is settled after notice of trial, and previous to the circuit, charges for an attorney’s fee and counsel-fee, prepared for trial, are not taxable. He also decided that where a motion is made in a number of causes embraced in the same notice and papers, although but one set of papers can be charged, an attorney’s fee and counsel-fee on motion in each cause, are proper items of taxation.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
12 Wend. 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conkling-v-bloodgood-nysupct-1835.